MA9-01574

MA9-01574

The panel rejected the claimants' applications because it did not accept the principal claimant's testimony as credible and determined that the claimants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection in Mexico on the balance of probabilities; accordingly they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
MA9-01574
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant Adult Child: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant Adult Child: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant Minor Child: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA (sections 96 and 97) / Hearing and Decision (hearing October 11, 2011; Decision January 4, 2012)
Outcome
Claim for refugee protection rejected
Legal Topics
Gender Related Persecution, Violence Against Women, State Protection, Credibility Findings, Exclusion Under Article 1 F, Domestic Violence
Source Language
English
Refugee Protection Immigration Human Rights Criminal Law Family Law Gender Related Persecution Violence Against Women State Protection +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant Adult Child

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant Adult Child

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant Minor Child

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA (sections 96 and 97) / Hearing and Decision (hearing October 11, 2011; Decision January 4, 2012)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Credibility of the principal claimant and her testimony
  2. 2 Whether state protection in Mexico was available and adequate
  3. 3 Whether the claimants qualify as Convention refugees or persons in need of protection

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claimants' applications because it did not accept the principal claimant's testimony as credible and determined that the claimants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection in Mexico on the balance of probabilities; accordingly they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claim for refugee protection rejected

Orders

  • Refugee protection claims of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX are rejected